Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Official: US ship fires on boat off Dubai, 1 dead

page: 2
27
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
CX

posted on Jul, 16 2012 @ 11:51 AM
link   
From Sky...


A US Navy vessel has fired on a small motor boat off the coast of the United Arab Emirates after it disregarded warnings, according to an American defence official.

He said the boat had been rapidly approaching the Navy ship USNS Rappahannock and the vessel "departed" after being fired on.

One person was killed and three others injured in the incident, a US consular official in Dubai said.

The official gave no other details, but it appeared the boat could have been mistaken as a threat in Gulf waters not far from Iran's maritime boundaries.

Dozens of police officers and other Emirati officials crowded around the white-hulled boat, which sat docked after the incident in a small Dubai port used by fishermen and sailors.

The boat appeared to be a civilian vessel about 30ft (nine metres) long and powered by three outboard motors.

Similar boats are used for fishing in the region, though Iran's Revolutionary Guard also employs relatively small, fast-moving craft in the Gulf.


One Killed' After US Vessel Fires On Boat

CX.




posted on Jul, 16 2012 @ 11:51 AM
link   
Deleted: duplicate post
edit on 16-7-2012 by LadySkadi because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 16 2012 @ 11:54 AM
link   
Ahh it becomes more clear. The vessel USNS Rappahannock is a support vessel. Maybe some can clarify for me but as far as I am aware these vessel are not necessarily manned by full time professional navy staff.

Still doesn't change the fact that this was an illegal act. May explain how it occured, nervous and inexperienced staff and result a bit of a tragedy.

Also demonstrates how things can quickly get out of control.



posted on Jul, 16 2012 @ 11:55 AM
link   
reply to post by murch
 


You obviously refuse to understand the Rules of Engagement properly. Today is not the same as it once was, threats are now more often than not from civilian craft.
edit on 16-7-2012 by Doom and Gloom because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 16 2012 @ 12:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by murch
Ahh it becomes more clear. The vessel USNS Rappahannock is a support vessel. Maybe some can clarify for me but as far as I am aware these vessel are not necessarily manned by full time professional navy staff.

Still doesn't change the fact that this was an illegal act. May explain how it occured, nervous and inexperienced staff and result a bit of a tragedy.

Also demonstrates how things can quickly get out of control.


What tragedy? All that boat had to do was to either cut it's engines or turn away. The Rappahannock might have at the most a .50 cal machine gun.



posted on Jul, 16 2012 @ 12:23 PM
link   
reply to post by murch
 



Still doesn't change the fact that this was an illegal act.


How is it an illegal act? A military ship is not to be approached.


A US Navy vessel has fired on a small motor boat off the coast of the United Arab Emirates after it disregarded warnings, according to an American defence official.


In highly tense Gulf Waters, you don't take a high-powered (3 outboard engines?) boat and rapidly approach a military ship and ignore warnings. Not unless you are suicidal!



posted on Jul, 16 2012 @ 12:34 PM
link   
Ok admitted. I was not aware of the change to the rules of engagement that the US had implemented.

That said these are the US rules of engagement. I still stand that this could have been avoided quite easily. All reports say that the vessel departed after being fired upon.

No warning shots. We still do not know at what distance the vessel was engaged at. I still don't know why people are defending this action.

The shoot first ask later policy is surely a bit risky in this area.

I thought the worst when I posted this, I now think its just a bit sad. Have visions of 4 fishermen thinking they could make a bit of cash selling fresh fish to the big boat.



posted on Jul, 16 2012 @ 12:38 PM
link   
reply to post by murch
 




I thought the worst when I posted this, I now think its just a bit sad. Have visions of 4 fishermen thinking they could make a bit of cash selling fresh fish to the big boat.



I was thinking something similar, and it would be sad if that was the case. But, I have friends from Bahrain, and in Bahrain they get something akin to $70k annual salary from the government for just being citizens, they get free education, and free healthcare. The boat they were driving is probably at least $150k or more to purchase.

These were not poor fisherman.



posted on Jul, 16 2012 @ 12:39 PM
link   
reply to post by murch
 


There are no "Warning Shots" even with small arms the military policy is that you shoot to kill. You shoot center mass. The US is not the only country that has these same ROE.



posted on Jul, 16 2012 @ 12:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by murch
If a guy walks down the street looking a bit dodgy he could be perceived to be a threat. You wouldn't get away with shooting him though.

This is supposedly the best equipped military in the world. What threat could it possibly have posed that it warranted shooting before it was correctly ID'ed.

The point is that actions like these are clearly against the Geneva convention. Targeting and shooting at unidentified targets is a terrible act of violence.

As for the usual rhetoric spouted about how Iran poses no threat. If the US enters into a damaging war against another sovereign country that will inevitably show the shortcomings of there military prowess and foreign policy decisions, then that's their problem.

What I don't like is that everyone else will inevitably be drawn into the conflict.


George Zimmerman begs to differ...



posted on Jul, 16 2012 @ 12:50 PM
link   
Yipikaiyeaaaaaa you turban wearing mf-ers !!!!!

Heeeeere coooomes Joohnny....



posted on Jul, 16 2012 @ 12:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Doom and Gloom
 


Yes I know the US is not the only one. That's also a bit sad. All the nations that adopted this (including my own) have adopted a policy that means whenever they are travelling in foreign waters they are effectively going to shoot any approaching craft that does not understand the warning message's given.

That means any craft that requires assistance and can't communicate risk getting shot at. Any indigenous population that recognize a symbol of wealth and try to capitalise on it risks getting shot.

Its fine for us to say they should know better (I did earlier on in this thread) but on retrospect they will not have the same background info we do. Imagine seeing this object of fascination and going for a closer look at this mighty vessel, thinking they will never see you as a threat, and waving at the crew on-board.

Started this thread in outrage, looking for a reason to decry modern politics and governments. I will end my contribution in a note of sadness, thinking how did we get here.

Almost wish it was malicious, would make more sense then.
edit on 16-7-2012 by murch because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 16 2012 @ 12:56 PM
link   
Seems procedures where followed...

official report.



july 16, 2012

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Release #102-12

USNS Rappahannock Fires After Vessel Ignores Warnings By U.S. Naval Forces Central Command Public Affairs U.S. FIFTH FLEET AREA OF OPERATIONS – An embarked security team aboard a U.S. Navy vessel fired upon a small motor vessel after it disregarded warnings and rapidly approached the U.S. ship near Jebel Ali, United Arab Emirates today.

In accordance with Navy force protection procedures, the sailors on the USNS Rappahannock (T-AO 204) used a series of non-lethal, preplanned responses to warn the vessel before resorting to lethal force. The U.S. crew repeatedly attempted to warn the vessel’s operators to turn away from their deliberate approach. When those efforts failed to deter the approaching vessel, the security team on the Rappahannock fired rounds from a .50-caliber machine gun.

The incident is under investigation.


Naval command
edit on 16/7/12 by Quantum_Squirrel because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 16 2012 @ 01:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by MarioOnTheFly
Yipikaiyeaaaaaa you turban wearing mf-ers !!!!!

Heeeeere coooomes Joohnny....


Really..........

REALLY??? smh..... can we be somewhat adult here?




posted on Jul, 16 2012 @ 01:00 PM
link   
reply to post by murch
 


While I agree that it is sad, when you try to look at the human aspect of it, you will only become more depressed. The state of humanity is in a sharp decline. It is not only our governments but society in general.



posted on Jul, 16 2012 @ 01:02 PM
link   
reply to post by Quantum_Squirrel
 



U.S. Navy vessel fired upon a small motor vessel


LOOOOOOOL. If it werent for the deaths...it would be comical. They were just about to deploy their torpedo...


Judging by the description of the boat...it no doubt posed a genuine threat, and need to be dealt with firmly. And...let's not forget...it was by the book.
edit on 16-7-2012 by MarioOnTheFly because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 16 2012 @ 01:15 PM
link   
After the USS Cole, I can only imagine that it wouldn't be a good idea to speed toward a U.S. Navy vessel under any circumstances.



posted on Jul, 16 2012 @ 01:55 PM
link   
I don't get why the OP is so adamant to make the ships crew like war criminals or something. This is in essence a Suicide by Cop incident, just on water and with boats.

For all you know, the boat was loaded with explosives or someone had an RPG. You just don't drive a powerboat towards a navy vessel, and come within 200ft of it just to be friendly.
edit on 16-7-2012 by nostromo85 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 16 2012 @ 02:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by nostromo85
I don't get why the OP is so adamant to make the ships crew like war criminals or something. This is in essence a Suicide by Cop incident, just on water and with boats.

For all you know, the boat was loaded with explosives or someone had an RPG. You just don't drive a powerboat towards a navy vessel, and come within 200ft of it just to be friendly.
edit on 16-7-2012 by nostromo85 because: (no reason given)


Yes...for all you know they could have been seeking help. Report says small motor boat and not a "power boat", and no, I don't stand as far as possible from someone when being friendly.



posted on Jul, 16 2012 @ 02:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by MarioOnTheFly

Originally posted by nostromo85
I don't get why the OP is so adamant to make the ships crew like war criminals or something. This is in essence a Suicide by Cop incident, just on water and with boats.

For all you know, the boat was loaded with explosives or someone had an RPG. You just don't drive a powerboat towards a navy vessel, and come within 200ft of it just to be friendly.
edit on 16-7-2012 by nostromo85 because: (no reason given)


Yes...for all you know they could have been seeking help. Report says small motor boat and not a "power boat", and no, I don't stand as far as possible from someone when being friendly.


It wasn't a "small motor boat," that initial report was wrong, either accidentally or intentionally. It was a 30 foot boat with 3 outboard motors. That is a hell of a fishing boat, costing between $150,000 to $200,000 here in Florida, or possibly even more depending on how it was outfitted. The boat that attacked the USS Cole and did major damage was basically driftwood compared to the boat used today!





new topics

top topics



 
27
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join